• Mg. sc. soc. Valērija Želve U



street art, preservation, graffiti, history


In many cities graffiti and street art is considered as vandalism and is often connected with crime. However, in some cities majority of the population does not agree with such a statement. They see street art and graffiti as decoration of the city. They think the artists deserve a safe space for expressing themselves. It is already a little step towards preserving the street art movement, as, of course, not all the citizens will share this opinion, since place of street art is still a very arguable question in many cities around the world. More and more organisations, associations and projects of different types are being created to promote and protect the urban art. Promotion of street art can be expressed in different ways, for example, panel discussions and workshops, exhibitions and festivals. Several street art and graffiti related spaces are being opened in Paris. Museums, warehouses, walls, schools – every kind of space could be used as a platform for the artists. This is also a nice way to show to the city council how important this culture is to the citizens of Paris. At the same time Riga cannot be yet proud of a thriving street art and graffiti culture. But what if Riga actually took Paris as an example? Could similar organisations in Latvia improve the society’s attitude towards urban cultures? Could the safe platform for street art be a solution for its popularization in Riga? The aim of this paper is to introduce organisations which promote and protect street art and graffiti in Paris and to evaluate if street art positions in Paris could actually be an example for Riga. The conclusion is that the bigger amount of such organisations is able to actually change the attitude of society towards the urban art and Riga can surely learn a lot from Paris – creating spaces for graffiti and street artists can not only make their positions better, but also it can have a positive impact for the city’s social life and attract a specific type of tourists to the capital.


Download data is not yet available.


Alksnis, K. (2014). Ekspresintervija ar Edgaru Zvirgzdiņu par “Blank Canvas., 20.05.2014. Available: (viewed 20.10.2017.)

Biographie. Miss Tic. Available: (viewed 10.10.2017.)

Free Riga. Available: (viewed 20.10.2017.)

Gabre, A. (2013). Grafiti: māksla vai cūcība? Neatkarīgā Rīta Avīze, 09.05.2013. Available: (viewed 10.10.2017.)

Grafiti mākslas eksponē Andrejsalā (2009). Neatkarīgā Rīta Avīze, 28.11.2009. Available: (viewed 10.10.2017.)

Kostov, A. B. (2014). History of Street Art in France: A Quick Overview. Widewalls. Available: (viewed 10.10.2017.)

Lab 14. Available: (viewed on 10.10.2017). LA COLLECTION NLL. Art 42. Available: (viewed 10.10.2017.)

L’Aérosol. Available: (viewed 20.10.2017.)

Le M.U.R. (Association Modulable, Urbain, Réactif ). Le Mur. Available: (viewed 10.10.2017.)

LE MUR / THE WALL. Le Mur. Available: (viewed 10.10.2017.)

Merrill, S. (2015). Keeping it real? Subcultural graffiti, street art, heritage and authenticity.

International Journal of Heritage Studies, Vol. 21, No. 4. Available: (viewed 20.10.2017.)

Miss. Tic. Available: (viewed 20.10.2017.)

MTO x Blank Canvas Festival in Riga, Latvia. Available: (viewed 20.10.2017.)

Ponosov, I. (2013). Street art as the Art of Action. Available: (viewed 23.10.2017.)

Riggle, N. A. (2010). Street Art: The Transfiguration of the Commonplaces. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Vol. 68, No. 3. Available: (viewed 20.10.2017.)

Sedliņa, A. (2007). Rīgas ielu Māksla / Street Art in Riga. Rīga: Raktuve.

Starptautiskais mākslas simpozijs “Mākslas dienas 2016. Pašportrets. Identitāte.” 02.–08.05.2016. Available: (viewed 20.10.2017.)

Zavakos, R. The Streets Are Art. Fresh Writing, Vol. 14. Available: (viewed 20.10.2017.)